[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Evolving radiation resistance
Of course, then this opens the issue of (1) you
identify individuals who are sensitive to a toxin; (2)
you refuse employment of that person; (3) this
demonstrates employment discrimination; and (4) you
loose your court case when sued for employment
discrimination.
This was the issue of women who sued National Lead in
the 1970s, I believe, for employment discrimination.
--- jjcohen <jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET> wrote:
> And to complicate matters further, if there were
> some objective scientific
> method of measuring the radiation
> resistance/sensitivity of individuals, it
> is reasonable to assume that for population groups,
> there would be a wide
> range even within specific localities and ethnic
> groups, as is the case with
> almost all other harmful agents. Setting reasonably
> safe exposure limits in
> such a situation could be somewhat tenuous. So the
> tacit, and incorrect ,
> assumption has been that humans are homogeneous in
> this regard. Should the
> radiation protection community ever decide to deal
> with questions of
> variable radiation sensitivity who should they
> protect----- the average
> individual, the most sensitive individual, or what?
> Jerry Cohen
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: A Karam <paksbi@rit.edu>
> To: <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
> Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2004 11:15 AM
> Subject: Evolving radiation resistance
>
>
> > One thing to remember about evolution is that it
> only works if organisms
> > die before they can reproduce. Natural background
> radiation levels,
> > even in Kerala or Ramsar, are not likely to cause
> death from cancer when
> > a person is in their teens or 20s.
> >
> > We should also remember that natural background
> radiation is responsible
> > for only a few percent of spontaneous DNA damage.
> This means, again,
> > that even a dramatic increase in background
> radiation levels will not
> > contribute markedly to additional DNA damage and
> is therefore unlikely
> > to cause a marked increase in carcinogenesis.
> >
> > Accordingly, it seems unlikely that living in
> these areas would
> > contribute any selection pressure towards
> developing a resistance to
> > radiation at these levels.
> >
> > Sorry....
> >
> > Andy
> >
> > P. Andrew Karam, Ph.D., CHP
> > Research Assistant Professor
> > Rochester Institute of Technology
> > Department of Biological Sciences
> > 85 Lomb Memorial Drive
> > Rochester, NY 14623
> > +1 585-475-6432
> > karam@mail.rit.edu
> >
> > "If A is success in life, then A equals X plus Y
> plus Z. Work is X; Y is
> > play; and Z is keeping your mouth shut." - Albert
> Einstein
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > One factor that I have not seen discussed in the
> hormesis debate is
> > natural
> > selection. Since man has for ever been exposed to
> natural radiation, is
> > it
> > not reasonable to assume that natural selection
> has reinforced our
> > resistance to any deleterious effects? Is it
> possible that the native
> > population of Kerala, for instance, has a greater
> resistance to
> > radiation
> > than areas with low natural radiation?
> >
> > My personal (uneducated!) feeling is that
> reasonable levels of natural
> > radiation (and occupational exposures to similar
> types and energies of
> > radiation) is something the human organism (and
> all other terrestrial
> > organisms) has adapted to. And that, as Dale
> states, the confounding
> > factors are so numerous (and over-riding) that
> confirmation, or
> > otherwise,
> > is extremely difficult.
> >
>
************************************************************************
> > You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe
> mailing list. To
> > unsubscribe, send an e-mail to
> Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the
> > text "unsubscribe radsafe" (no quote marks) in the
> body of the e-mail,
> > with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe
> archives at
> > http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/
> >
>
>
************************************************************************
> You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing
> list. To
> unsubscribe, send an e-mail to
> Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the
> text "unsubscribe radsafe" (no quote marks) in the
> body of the e-mail,
> with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe
> archives at
> http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/
>
>
=====
+++++++++++++++++++
"Everyone is ignorant, only on different subjects."
Will Rogers
-- John
John Jacobus, MS
Certified Health Physicist
e-mail: crispy_bird@yahoo.com
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To
unsubscribe, send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the
text "unsubscribe radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail,
with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe archives at
http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/